Cluster 9406092
green
· 187 citation events
across 7 courts.
Showing the 50 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
yellow
JENSEN v. GENESIS LABORATORY MANAGEMENT, LLC (2025)
Herbert v. Dizney, 295 F. App’x 717, 723 (5th Cir. 2008) (finding that relators’ allegations that the defendants “routinely failed to collect . . . co-insurance payments,” and that “Medicaid was routinely billed for the portion not paid by other payers” failed to meet the heightened pleading standards under Rule 9(b)); but see Riedel, 332 F. Supp. 3d at 67-68 (finding that the relator sufficiently alleged facts that could implicate the Anti-Kickback statute by asserting that…
green
HIMES v. FIVE BELOW, INC. (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023) (“Under [the PSLRA pleading] standard, the complaint must describe the time, place, and contents of the false representations or omissions, as well as the identity of the person making the statement and the basis for the statement’s falsity.”).
“Under [the PSLRA pleading] standard, the complaint must describe the time, place, and contents of the false representations or omissions, as well as the identity of the person making the statement and the basis for the statement’s falsity.”
green
FELDMAN v. SCYNEXIS, INC (2025)
Plaintiff does not allege any internal and/or contradictory information undercutting Defendants’ belief that they and any third-party contractor was compliant with cGMP beyond an argument of fraud by hindsight when alleging GSK was able to “quickly uncover[] that Scynexis was not complying with current Good Manufacturing Practices, resulting in a recall and the cratering of the Company’s stock.” (ECF No. 14 at 17.) See City of Warren Police, 70 F.4th at 693 (“[T]he PSLRA for…
“[T]he PSLRA forbids reliance on ‘speculative fraud by hindsight’ allegations”
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 685-86 (3d Cir. 2023) (“Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) . . . § 11 and Rule 10b-5 share[s] the same standard of materiality for misleading statements.”). was “[t]he belief of the Special Committee” that CD&R’s offer presented the “Best Value Reasonably Obtainable.” (D.I. 28-2 at 55).
“Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) . . . § 11 and Rule 10b-5 share[s] the same standard of materiality for misleading statements.”
green
PATEL v. COINBASE GLOBAL, INC. (2024)
See Advanta Corp., 180 F.3d at 538 ; City of Warren Police, 70 F.4th at 686 (“An opinion statement . . . is not necessarily misleading when an issuer knows, but fails to disclose, some fact cutting the other way.”).
“An opinion statement . . . is not necessarily misleading when an issuer knows, but fails to disclose, some fact cutting the other way.”
green
BUCKLEY v. T-MOBILE, USA INC. (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023) (“Together, § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 imply a private cause of action for securities fraud.”). 26 15 U.S.C. § 78r(a). 27 Mr. Buckley provides only a general statement but does not allege T-Mobile sells his personal information.
“Together, § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 imply a private cause of action for securities fraud.”
green
CONNOR v. UNISYS CORPORATION (2024)
See City of Warren, 70 F.4th at 693 (“The fraud-by-hindsight prohibition has its greatest potency in the context of otherwise deficient allegations of scienter”).
“The fraud-by-hindsight prohibition has its greatest potency in the context of otherwise deficient allegations of scienter”
green
WIGGLESWORTH v. MAIDEN HOLDINGS, LTD. (2023)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., 70 F. 4th 668, 685 (3d Cir. 2023) (“Omnicare's framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) for violations of Rule 10b-5.”).
“Omnicare's framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) for violations of Rule 10b-5.”
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., 70 F. 4th 668 , 685 (3d Cir. 2023) (“Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under [Section] 10(b) for violations of [SEC] Rule 10b–5.”).
“Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under [Section] 10(b) for violations of [SEC] Rule 10b–5.”
green
SLT Imports Inc v. SAR Transport Systems Pvt Ltd (2026)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023) (quoting Fed.
quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b)
green
The Chemours Company Securities Litigation (2026)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023) (cleaned up)).
cleaned up
green
FNY Partners Fund LP, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, and David R. Hurwitz, individual… (2026)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
Dale Ylitalo, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Automatic Data Processing, Inc.,… (2026)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
Ryan Shulman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bradley M. Weston and Todd E. Vo… (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023); see also Laborers Loc.
green
Shmuel Levy, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Jason Luo, James Taylor, Albert L… (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 685 (3d Cir. 2023) (holding that “Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) for violations of Rule 10b-5”).
holding that “Omnicare’s framework for evaluating opinion falsity applies to claims under § 10(b) for violations of Rule 10b-5”
Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 “imply a private cause of action for securities fraud.” Roofer’s Pension Fund v. Papa, 687 F. Supp. 3d 604 , 616 (D.N.J. 2023) (quoting City of Warren Police & Fire Dep’t Retirement Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d.
green
Eva Migliore v. Vision Solar LLC (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023) (citation omitted).
citation omitted
green
DORIN v. EXSCIENTIA P.L.C. (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
BARBEE v. AMIRA NATURE FOODS, LTD. (2025)
Sys., 70 F.4th at 680.
green
In re: Walmart Inc. Securities Litigation v. (2025)
“By virtue of Civil Rule 9(b) and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the ‘PSLRA’), heightened pleading standards govern securities fraud claims brought under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.” Prudential, 70 F.4th at 680.
green
Holland v. RiteAid Corp. (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023)).
Prudential, 70 F.4th at 684.
green
LUDWIG v. FCA US LLC (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
PATTERSON v. OCUGEN, INC. (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023)).
green
MEADE v. LINCOLN NATIONAL CORPORATION (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
ARZATE v. AWESOME LIFE GROUP, LLC (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023) (citation omitted).
citation omitted
green
Transperfect Holdings LLC v. Robert Pincus (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023) (discussing Omnicare, Inc., 575 U.S. 175 ).
discussing Omnicare, Inc., 575 U.S. 175
green
GOULD VENTURES, LLC v. COOLEY, LLP (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023)).
green
Heagney v. Garland (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 682 (3d Cir. 2023) (dismissing claim where the amended complaint failed to “provide facts showing that [the defendant] did not generally consider a variety of factors”).
dismissing claim where the amended complaint failed to “provide facts showing that [the defendant] did not generally consider a variety of factors”
green
Charles Bennett v. Bayer Corporation (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023); Foglia v. Renal Ventures Mgmt., LLC, 754 F.3d 153, 155 (3d Cir. 2014).
green
KARDOSH v. MCCALLIN (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023); see also U.S. ex rel.
green
Charles Bennett v. Bayer Corporation (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023); Foglia v. Renal Ventures Mgmt., LLC, 754 F.3d 153, 155 (3d Cir. 2014).
green
PUENTE v. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023); see also Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148, 157 (2008) (finding that “a typical § 10(b) private action[] plaintiff” must prove the same six elements).
green
PAGE v. RITE AID CORPORATION (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023)).
green
Innovate 2, Corp. v. Motorsport Games Inc. (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023) (em- phasis omitted).
em- phasis omitted
green
Levy v. Luo (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 686 (3d Cir. 2023) (finding allegations sufficient when statements were directly attributed to an individual, and contrasting such allegations with those in Janus where allegations that a person was “significantly involved” were insufficient); In re Merck & Co., Ine.
finding allegations sufficient when statements were directly attributed to an individual, and contrasting such allegations with those in Janus where allegations that a person was “significantly involved” were insufficient
green
HAMMOND v. HARRY (2025)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023) (citing Fed.
citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b)
green
O'MEARA v. SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC. (2025)
Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
CAMMARATA v. DONNELLY (2025)
Prudential Financial, Inc., 70 F. 4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
STERLING v. IRIS ENERGY LIMITED (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 684-85 (3d Cir. 2023) (citing Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist.
citing Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund, 575 U.S. 175, 184-89 (2015)
green
HENRY v. FUTU HOLDINGS LIMITED (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
GORLAMARI v. VERRICA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
O'MEARA v. SHIFT4 PAYMENTS, INC. (2024)
Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 679 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
IN RE BIOLINERX LTD. SECURITIES LITIGATION (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023).
green
In re: Walmart Inc. Securities Litigation (2024)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 685 (3d Cir, 2023). 20 2.
green
Nash v. Qualtrics International Inc. (2024)
Even if the court were to characterize the alleged misrepresentations as opinions, the allegations nonetheless support Plaintiff's cause of action at Count I of the complaint. “[Fjor claims under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, an opinion statement is misleading if it: (i) was not sincerely believed when made; (ii) contains an expressly embedded, untrue factual assertion; or (iii) reasonably implies untrue facts and omits appropriate qualifying language.” City of Warren Police & Fir…
green
Diaz v. FCA US LLC (2023)
Sys. v. Prudential Fin., Inc., 70 F.4th 668, 680 (3d Cir. 2023); see also Langston v. Ethicon Inc., No. 3:20-CV-3712-S, 2021 WL 6198218 , at *2 (N.D.